RE: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
While I sold all my P67 gear about a year and a half ago before the prices plunged, ( I hated the bulk and weight of the system ) I did keep one medium format camera, my Zeiss Super Ikonta III which has a coated 75mm F3.5 Tessar and folds up much smaller than a 35mm SLR. I sure am glad I did as I have been using it again this month and the quality really is signifigantly better than 35mm that's for sure. The small size is great. Check out this page I just put together showing pix of this vs. a Pentax Spotmatic: http://www.jcoconnell.com/temp/si_iii.htm enjoy! JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 1:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Speaking of Medium Format Well, we touched on medium format the other day. However, I read something interesting on the Photo.Net wedding photographer's list this morning. Marc Williams, the same chap who posted nice comments about the *istD on the Leica forum, posted some interesting observations about MF vs. digital. Marc is a wedding photographer and a studio pro. He's been shooting digital for quite some time, most recently with the Canon 1DS. He was shooting all his weddings on digital but grew weary of the digital darkroom processing. Most recently, he's gone back to shooting weddings with a 'blad and three lenses. He says he just turns his film into the lab and gets a set of proofs. He no longer has to convert every image and print them. He scans and prints his finals, but he claims it's far less work. He also feels the 6x6 results are superior to the 1DS digital images. You can find the thread on the Photo.Net wedding photographers forum if you're interested in reading the entire debate. (It drew quite a few responses.) I took out my 6x7 gear this morning and inspected it. I think I'm going to shoot some MF BW next nice day. I have an urge to get back in the darkroom with some nice, big negatives. Paul
RE: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
Instead of pictures of your cameras (which are nice to see) how about some pictures TAKEN by the camera. Shel > [Original Message] > From: J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > While I sold all my P67 gear about a year and a half ago before the > prices plunged, ( I hated the bulk and weight of the system ) I did keep > one medium format camera, my Zeiss Super Ikonta III which has a coated > 75mm F3.5 Tessar and folds up much smaller than a 35mm SLR. I sure am > glad I did as I have been using it again this month and the quality > really is signifigantly better than 35mm that's for sure. The small > size is great. > > Check out this page I just put together showing pix of this vs. a Pentax > Spotmatic: > > http://www.jcoconnell.com/temp/si_iii.htm
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
It looks a lot like my Agfa Isolette. Is it scale focusing? On Nov 28, 2004, at 3:00 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: While I sold all my P67 gear about a year and a half ago before the prices plunged, ( I hated the bulk and weight of the system ) I did keep one medium format camera, my Zeiss Super Ikonta III which has a coated 75mm F3.5 Tessar and folds up much smaller than a 35mm SLR. I sure am glad I did as I have been using it again this month and the quality really is signifigantly better than 35mm that's for sure. The small size is great. Check out this page I just put together showing pix of this vs. a Pentax Spotmatic: http://www.jcoconnell.com/temp/si_iii.htm enjoy! JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 1:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Speaking of Medium Format Well, we touched on medium format the other day. However, I read something interesting on the Photo.Net wedding photographer's list this morning. Marc Williams, the same chap who posted nice comments about the *istD on the Leica forum, posted some interesting observations about MF vs. digital. Marc is a wedding photographer and a studio pro. He's been shooting digital for quite some time, most recently with the Canon 1DS. He was shooting all his weddings on digital but grew weary of the digital darkroom processing. Most recently, he's gone back to shooting weddings with a 'blad and three lenses. He says he just turns his film into the lab and gets a set of proofs. He no longer has to convert every image and print them. He scans and prints his finals, but he claims it's far less work. He also feels the 6x6 results are superior to the 1DS digital images. You can find the thread on the Photo.Net wedding photographers forum if you're interested in reading the entire debate. (It drew quite a few responses.) I took out my 6x7 gear this morning and inspected it. I think I'm going to shoot some MF BW next nice day. I have an urge to get back in the darkroom with some nice, big negatives. Paul
RE: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
No way, Jose. It's a split image rangefinder. See the little window to the left of viewfinder window? It is a dead giveaway for the RF. BTW, Zeiss used the name "Super" Ikonta for all of its rangefinder models. The cheaper models without RF were just called "Ikontas". JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 3:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III It looks a lot like my Agfa Isolette. Is it scale focusing? On Nov 28, 2004, at 3:00 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > While I sold all my P67 gear about a year and a half ago before the > prices plunged, ( I hated the bulk and weight of the system ) I did > keep one medium format camera, my Zeiss Super Ikonta III which has a > coated 75mm F3.5 Tessar and folds up much smaller than a 35mm SLR. I > sure am glad I did as I have been using it again this month and the > quality really is signifigantly better than 35mm that's for sure. The > small size is great. > > Check out this page I just put together showing pix of this vs. a > Pentax > Spotmatic: > > http://www.jcoconnell.com/temp/si_iii.htm > > enjoy! > > JCO > > -Original Message- > From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 1:48 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Speaking of Medium Format > > > Well, we touched on medium format the other day. However, I read > something interesting on the Photo.Net wedding photographer's list > this morning. Marc Williams, the same chap who posted nice comments > about the *istD on the Leica forum, posted some interesting > observations about MF vs. digital. Marc is a wedding photographer and > a studio pro. He's been shooting digital for quite some time, most > recently with the Canon 1DS. He was shooting all his weddings on > digital but grew weary of the digital darkroom processing. Most > recently, he's gone back to shooting weddings with a 'blad and three > lenses. He says he just turns his film into the lab and gets a set of > proofs. He no longer has to convert every image and print them. He > scans and prints his finals, but he claims it's far less work. He also > feels the 6x6 results are superior to the 1DS digital images. You can > find the thread on the Photo.Net wedding photographers forum if you're > interested in reading the entire debate. (It drew quite a few > responses.) > > I took out my 6x7 gear this morning and inspected it. I think I'm > going to shoot some MF BW next nice day. I have an urge to get back in > the darkroom with some nice, big negatives. Paul >
RE: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
I would also really appreciate seeing what this camera is capable of. I've been thinking of picking up something like this. A "pocketable" 220 camera is very attractive! Please share some photos when you get a chance! Thanks. --- "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While I sold all my P67 gear about a year and a half > ago before the > prices plunged, ( I hated the bulk and weight of the > system ) I did keep > one medium format camera, my Zeiss Super Ikonta III > which has a coated > 75mm F3.5 Tessar and folds up much smaller than a > 35mm SLR. I sure am > glad I did as I have been using it again this month > and the quality > really is signifigantly better than 35mm that's for > sure. The small > size is great. > > Check out this page I just put together showing pix > of this vs. a Pentax > Spotmatic: > > http://www.jcoconnell.com/temp/si_iii.htm > > enjoy! > > JCO > > -Original Message- > From: Paul Stenquist > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 1:48 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Speaking of Medium Format > > > Well, we touched on medium format the other day. > However, I read > something interesting on the Photo.Net wedding > photographer's list this > morning. Marc Williams, the same chap who posted > nice comments about > the *istD on the Leica forum, posted some > interesting observations > about MF vs. digital. Marc is a wedding photographer > and a studio pro. > He's been shooting digital for quite some time, most > recently with the > Canon 1DS. He was shooting all his weddings on > digital but grew weary > of the digital darkroom processing. Most recently, > he's gone back to > shooting weddings with a 'blad and three lenses. He > says he just turns > his film into the lab and gets a set of proofs. He > no longer has to > convert every image and print them. He scans and > prints his finals, but > he claims it's far less work. He also feels the 6x6 > results are > superior to the 1DS digital images. You can find the > thread on the > Photo.Net wedding photographers forum if you're > interested in reading > the entire debate. (It drew quite a few responses.) > > I took out my 6x7 gear this morning and inspected > it. I think I'm going > to shoot some MF BW next nice day. I have an urge to > get back in the > darkroom with some nice, big negatives. > Paul > > __ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
RE: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
FYI, The camera uses a coated ZEISS TESSAR lens which are pretty well known for excellent image quality in all formats. Seems pretty damn sharp to me in the F8-F11 range I normally shoot with. I will try to post some when I get a chance. It uses 120, not 220, film though, 12 exposures, 6X6 cm per roll. JCO -Original Message- From: Steve Pearson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 4:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III I would also really appreciate seeing what this camera is capable of. I've been thinking of picking up something like this. A "pocketable" 220 camera is very attractive! Please share some photos when you get a chance! Thanks. --- "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While I sold all my P67 gear about a year and a half > ago before the > prices plunged, ( I hated the bulk and weight of the > system ) I did keep > one medium format camera, my Zeiss Super Ikonta III > which has a coated > 75mm F3.5 Tessar and folds up much smaller than a > 35mm SLR. I sure am > glad I did as I have been using it again this month > and the quality > really is signifigantly better than 35mm that's for > sure. The small > size is great. > > Check out this page I just put together showing pix > of this vs. a Pentax > Spotmatic: > > http://www.jcoconnell.com/temp/si_iii.htm > > enjoy! > > JCO > > -Original Message- > From: Paul Stenquist > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 1:48 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Speaking of Medium Format > > > Well, we touched on medium format the other day. > However, I read > something interesting on the Photo.Net wedding > photographer's list this > morning. Marc Williams, the same chap who posted > nice comments about > the *istD on the Leica forum, posted some > interesting observations > about MF vs. digital. Marc is a wedding photographer > and a studio pro. > He's been shooting digital for quite some time, most > recently with the > Canon 1DS. He was shooting all his weddings on > digital but grew weary > of the digital darkroom processing. Most recently, > he's gone back to > shooting weddings with a 'blad and three lenses. He > says he just turns > his film into the lab and gets a set of proofs. He > no longer has to > convert every image and print them. He scans and > prints his finals, but > he claims it's far less work. He also feels the 6x6 > results are > superior to the 1DS digital images. You can find the > thread on the > Photo.Net wedding photographers forum if you're > interested in reading > the entire debate. (It drew quite a few responses.) > > I took out my 6x7 gear this morning and inspected > it. I think I'm going > to shoot some MF BW next nice day. I have an urge to > get back in the > darkroom with some nice, big negatives. > Paul > > __ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
On 28/11/04, Shel Belinkoff, discombobulated, unleashed: >Instead of pictures of your cameras (which are nice to see) how about some >pictures TAKEN by the camera. appropriately labelled in the subject line of course so that those who wish to divert such sacrilege straight to the trash, can do ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
- Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Instead of pictures of your cameras (which are nice to see) how about some > pictures TAKEN by the camera. > > Shel > Don't let the camera do whe whole job, guys...:-)
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
sounds kinda like "instead of posting pictures of pretty girls (which are nice to see) how about some mashed potatoes MADE by the girl" :) best, mishka On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 12:09:49 -0800, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Instead of pictures of your cameras (which are nice to see) how about some > pictures TAKEN by the camera. > > Shel
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
Nice. I'll have to keep my eye open for one of those. Looks like fun. On Nov 28, 2004, at 4:07 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: No way, Jose. It's a split image rangefinder. See the little window to the left of viewfinder window? It is a dead giveaway for the RF. BTW, Zeiss used the name "Super" Ikonta for all of its rangefinder models. The cheaper models without RF were just called "Ikontas". JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 3:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III It looks a lot like my Agfa Isolette. Is it scale focusing? On Nov 28, 2004, at 3:00 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: While I sold all my P67 gear about a year and a half ago before the prices plunged, ( I hated the bulk and weight of the system ) I did keep one medium format camera, my Zeiss Super Ikonta III which has a coated 75mm F3.5 Tessar and folds up much smaller than a 35mm SLR. I sure am glad I did as I have been using it again this month and the quality really is signifigantly better than 35mm that's for sure. The small size is great. Check out this page I just put together showing pix of this vs. a Pentax Spotmatic: http://www.jcoconnell.com/temp/si_iii.htm enjoy! JCO -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 1:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Speaking of Medium Format Well, we touched on medium format the other day. However, I read something interesting on the Photo.Net wedding photographer's list this morning. Marc Williams, the same chap who posted nice comments about the *istD on the Leica forum, posted some interesting observations about MF vs. digital. Marc is a wedding photographer and a studio pro. He's been shooting digital for quite some time, most recently with the Canon 1DS. He was shooting all his weddings on digital but grew weary of the digital darkroom processing. Most recently, he's gone back to shooting weddings with a 'blad and three lenses. He says he just turns his film into the lab and gets a set of proofs. He no longer has to convert every image and print them. He scans and prints his finals, but he claims it's far less work. He also feels the 6x6 results are superior to the 1DS digital images. You can find the thread on the Photo.Net wedding photographers forum if you're interested in reading the entire debate. (It drew quite a few responses.) I took out my 6x7 gear this morning and inspected it. I think I'm going to shoot some MF BW next nice day. I have an urge to get back in the darkroom with some nice, big negatives. Paul
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
Cotty wrote: appropriately labelled in the subject line of course so that those who wish to divert such sacrilege straight to the trash, can do ;-) Hey, you can't talk, Cotty - I spotted you making an on-topic post not a week ago! S
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
Mishka wrote: Instead of pictures of your cameras (which are nice to see) how about some pictures TAKEN by the camera. Shel > sounds kinda like "instead of posting pictures of pretty girls (which are nice to see) how about some mashed potatoes MADE by the girl" :) M, tasty tasty mashed potato... S
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
if forced to pick between soft porn and fast food, i think i'll take the former. best, mishka On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:25:17 +, Steve Jolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mishka wrote: > > > >>Instead of pictures of your cameras (which are nice to see) how about some > >>pictures TAKEN by the camera. > >> > >>Shel > > > > sounds kinda like "instead of posting pictures of pretty girls (which > > are nice to see) > > how about some mashed potatoes MADE by the girl" > > :) > > M, tasty tasty mashed potato... > > S > >
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
Ahhh, we're straying again. I think the bottom-most photo is excellent. I blew it up to over twice life size on my screen, and it maintains it's quality very well. Much better than a 35mm shot, or most digital images. Nice camera indeed. keith whaley [...] Instead of pictures of your cameras (which are nice to see) how about some pictures TAKEN by the camera. Shel [...]
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
On 29/11/04, Steve Jolly, discombobulated, unleashed: >Hey, you can't talk, Cotty - I spotted you making an on-topic post not a >week ago! Damn, I'm slipping! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
Tuesday, November 30, 2004, 12:57:17 PM, Collin wrote: CB> Tessar designs are very practical because of their excellent CB> sharpness over most of the covered area. They're somewhat better CB> than triplet or Xenar designs, especially seen in the corners. CB> It's what makes the YashicaMat124 series a really good camera. CB> (My Rodenstock Ysarex 135mm 4x5 lens is a Tessar as well.) Isn't Xenar a direct Tessar copy? I agree that it is definitely worth getting a MF camera with at least a Tessar. I had the Yashica with the triplet lens and it was quite worse than similar Tessar-equipped ones. Apart from tonality, it didn't resolve any more details than 35mm SLR with a good normal lens. Good light! fra
Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
Schneider Xenar lenses are 4-element tessar-type designs. I've got two of them kicking around at home, and an old Zeiss Tessar as well. Lens arrangements look to be identical on them. -Mat On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:00:06 +0100, Frantisek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Tuesday, November 30, 2004, 12:57:17 PM, Collin wrote: > CB> Tessar designs are very practical because of their excellent > CB> sharpness over most of the covered area. They're somewhat better > CB> than triplet or Xenar designs, especially seen in the corners. > CB> It's what makes the YashicaMat124 series a really good camera. > CB> (My Rodenstock Ysarex 135mm 4x5 lens is a Tessar as well.) > > Isn't Xenar a direct Tessar copy? > > I agree that it is definitely worth getting a MF camera with at least a > Tessar. I had the Yashica with the triplet lens and it was quite worse > than similar Tessar-equipped ones. Apart from tonality, it didn't > resolve any more details than 35mm SLR with a good normal lens. > > Good light! >fra > >
Re: RE: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta III
Tessar designs are very practical because of their excellent sharpness over most of the covered area. They're somewhat better than triplet or Xenar designs, especially seen in the corners. It's what makes the YashicaMat124 series a really good camera. (My Rodenstock Ysarex 135mm 4x5 lens is a Tessar as well.) I wouldn't mind having a Super Iknonta III. Sincerely, C. Brendemuehl Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net
